Originally Posted by BigStar

Rude? Shit. I was trying to be funny and lighten things up. Maybe it would've been if you were lit up. It's just Commander In Chief was just such a cheesy show. I'm cool with Star Trek though, and Avril Lavinge got me considerable ass when I was in my skating phase. Also, A Leauge of Their Own is like, my favorite movie pretty much, because it has a lot of alien killing and humans having sex. Or was that Starship Troopers? I get those two confused sometimes, like De Niro and Pacino.

O-kaayyy.

Problem is, I watched the Superbowl Shuffle like 140 times already today on youtube just to get myself pissed off and ready for the bears to lose to NO, so I'm a little bit tired and forgetful.

You didn't, really? Well, no wonder you're in a bad mood. 140 times??



::looks around desperately for William's (Seminomad's) barf bag::

Also, I'd be curious to know what your daughter thinks of Mr. Micheal Holmgren, seeing as he is my favorite Seahawk and probably the best coach of all time

Direct quote:

"BOOOOO!!! YOU SUCK!!!"

(Unfortunately, I didn't get to hear her serenade his TV image this past Sunday as she was off watching the UW women's basketball team in Madison -- but not to worry, she'll soon crank up a certain gem from the Happy Schnapps Combo on her iTunes (hint: it's track six).

{There's all sorts of kewl un-PC stuff on that CD besides}

Originally Posted by BigStar

Think how cool this would sound if Sam Spade said it

Well, I guess that when you have appaently stoned stoners making comments like that it is time to re-read the thread.

In reading the comments will add that I understand why some posters feel that the Boxer-Rice confrontation was somewhat unfair. In the larger scheme of things, I'm actually not totally unsympathetic to that position. Having said that I must add that from a saecular perspective the harshness that many percieve in American politics is not likely to get better soon. It will likely get worse.

And that's why I don't find what has happened outrageous. Rice is a publc figure and public figures have been exposed to attacks that some feel are unfair. Politics is a hardball sport. In the openness of the 3t/4t cusp the gloves are notably off. As I stated above, I believe that this is likely to continue for some time.

I suppose that if the theory is correct than in about 20 years when the midlife X'ers come to dominate political debate, the "bipartisan" or perhaps by then multi partisan approach will be in vogue. But we won't be tere for quite some time.

Now for the olive branch. This arguement is going nowhere and has degenerated to personal attacks and needs to end. I know that John has a sense of humor that is off putting to me. I know that peope have different ways of looking at things. John's intentions are probabally not be as dark as I supposed. I know mine aren't as dark as he currenly implies. He may chose to comment some more on this item, but as for now, I plan to reserve comment.

Originally Posted by BigStar

I don't know what you're proving, beyond maybe that your child has mediocre taste in entertainment (And quarterbacks for that matter), but does what entertains you really define who you are.

Is it my imagination or did you just insult Kiff's kid?

You make me want them to bring back the draft and invade everywhere.

Them? The Quarterbacks?

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Well, I guess that when you have appaently stoned stoners making comments like that it is time to re-read the thread.

Hell, and I thought we were all stoners on this forum! Ha ha

Originally Posted by BigStar

Them? The Quarterbacks?

Why wait kid? Sign up today. "It's fun to kill some people."

Originally Posted by Linus

Is it my imagination or did you just insult Kiff's kid?

You make me want them to bring back the draft and invade everywhere.

Originally Posted by BigStar

Them? The Quarterbacks?

Now that was funny!

Why wait kid? Sign up today. "It's fun to kill some people."

Somehow I missed this little snide comment when I was scrolling through last, and I just completed a post in response that included the line "come to the northwest and I'll mangle your fucking face". The offer still stands, but really you little bitch you aren't even worth my time. I signed my contract two weeks ago and by the time I get my diploma I'll be at Ft. Knox for armor training, so if you want to come call me kid to my face you know where I'm at and I just want you to know that this Millenial will ruin your whole day. Snide stupid pieces of shit like you are the type who make the world less liveable for people with some dedication to service. I hope you die before the 4T so you wont even have the chance to make something of yourself. Have fun at work.

Originally Posted by BigStar

I signed my contract two weeks ago and by the time I get my diploma I'll be at Ft. Knox for armor training,

So your going to be in armor? May all go well for you. Hopefully you'll still be able to post sometimes after you get to the bluegrass state and after that.

Originally Posted by BigStar

Somehow I missed this little snide comment when I was scrolling through last, and I just completed a post in response that included the line "come to the northwest and I'll mangle your fucking face". The offer still stands, but really you little bitch you aren't even worth my time. I signed my contract two weeks ago and by the time I get my diploma I'll be at Ft. Knox for armor training, so if you want to come call me kid to my face you know where I'm at and I just want you to know that this Millenial will ruin your whole day. Snide stupid pieces of shit like you are the type who make the world less liveable for people with some dedication to service. I hope you die before the 4T so you wont even have the chance to make something of yourself. Have fun at work.

It's just a snide comment. We all make em'. No reason to go all Millenial on us.

So your going to be in armor? May all go well for you. Hopefully you'll still be able to post sometimes after you get to the bluegrass state and after that.

Thanks. I should be able to, as I'll have my laptop eventually, but of course that will be after basic and what not.

While it's unfortunate that you can't be a Benning Boy

My brother just got off Sand Hill at Benning today; leaving for Jump School I think before he has to come back to Benning for Ranger training.


Thanks for the kind words from the last three posters. Now all I have to do it quit cig's and I'll be ready for the "surge"! An Abram's top speed is like 45-50 and I definitely intend to race imported Yugo's on the backstreets of Baghdad, even if it gets me a discharge. I should also have some cool pictures for all of you assuming I get sent over.

Yeah, if you really want to insult another male, use a term associated with women. As I was saying before....

Originally Posted by BigStar

Somehow I missed this little snide comment when I was scrolling through last, and I just completed a post in response that included the line "come to the northwest and I'll mangle your fucking face". The offer still stands, but really you little bitch you aren't even worth my time.

Originally Posted by wanderer

Hell, and I thought we were all stoners on this forum! Ha ha

Stoner? Not me. I've never been stoned in my life.

Somehow I missed this little snide comment when I was scrolling through last, and I just completed a post in response that included the line "come to the northwest and I'll mangle your fucking face". The offer still stands, but really you little bitch you aren't even worth my time. I signed my contract two weeks ago and by the time I get my diploma I'll be at Ft. Knox for armor training, so if you want to come call me kid to my face you know where I'm at and I just want you to know that this Millenial will ruin your whole day. Snide stupid pieces of shit like you are the type who make the world less liveable for people with some dedication to service. I hope you die before the 4T so you wont even have the chance to make something of yourself. Have fun at work.

Whoa, I just re-read this and it really did sound a little harsh. My bad man, I hope you really don't want me to get killed a some foriegn shithole, because I really don't want to ruin any one of your days.

Dear Mr. Saari,

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

> I have recommended the works of slave owners: Geo. Washington,
> John Taylor of Caroline, John Randolph of Roanoak, of
> anti-semites: Martin Luther, Henry Adams, Edward de Vere-17th Earl
> of Oxford, sodomites: Andre Gide, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde.
> anti-Americans: Samuel Johnson, Evelyn Waugh, royalists: Madame de
> Lafayette, Edmund Burke, skeptics: David Hume, Voltaire, etc.,
> etc. so I do not quail at Ms. French.

It's OK to recommend those people, but stop recommending radical
feminists. You DID say that you're my obedient servant, didn't you?

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Kiff,

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

> John, this really comes off (to me, anyway) as being over the
> top.

Ah yes, but there's so much that's over the top in today's society,
isn't there?

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

> John, for what it's worth, she was completely enthralled by the
> show "Commander-in-Chief" for the brief period it was on, because
> it starred Geena Davis as the President.

I liked "Commander-in-Chief" too, which is interesting because I had
expected to hate it. But it turned out to be less patronizing than
"The West Wing." Even the evil conservative Republican, Nathan
Templeton, turned out to have some redeeming qualities.

But I would argue that your daughter liked it for the same reason.
If the feminist message had been too patronizing, then it would have
been a turnoff to both of us.

As for make-up, homemade tie-dyed T-shirts, and ripped jeans, she's
on her own.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Pat,

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

> Excuse ME! I'M a feminist and I say Boxer was way out of line.

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought that you were defending her.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Rick,

Originally Posted by herbal tee

> There's nothing wrong with admitting that you've made mistakes.
> It's time for you to admit that you've made mistakes. It's time
> for you to apologize.[/ quote]

> I cut your ad hominum attack down to its essentials. Calling me a
> liar redundantly does not make me one. I have lied about nothing.
> The record is what it is.

> Defending pigs? Oh, I get it, you post a picture of a pig and
> label it with the name of a jewish woman-Senator Boxers name,
> how classy can you get.

> Your a real work Xenakis, I have nothing to aploigize for and will
> not apoligize to you about anything.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

> Now for the olive branch. This arguement is going nowhere and has
> degenerated to personal attacks and needs to end. I know that John
> has a sense of humor that is off putting to me. I know that peope
> have different ways of looking at things. John's intentions are
> probabally not be as dark as I supposed. I know mine aren't as
> dark as he currenly implies. He may chose to comment some more on
> this item, but as for now, I plan to reserve comment.

What I was doing was imitating and mocking you (and by "you" I mean
you and other leftist Boomers).

You accuse President Bush of lying about WMDS, so I accused you of
lying. You accuse President Bush of not being open, honest and
truthful with the American people, and I accused you of not being
open, honest and truthful with the forum people. You accuse Bush of
covering up, and I accused you of covering up. You accuse Bush of
attacking the press, and I accused you of having an enemies list. You
accuse Bush of breaking the law, and I accused you of purposely lying
to cover up a previous lie. You demand that Bush admit he made
mistakes, and I demanded that you admit you made mistakes. I modeled
my language, as closely as I could, to the language that you use with
Bush. And I used that wonderful line, "It's time for you to admit
you made mistakes, so that we can all move on."

Now, you can get all pissed off at me if you want, and call me all
the names you want -- hell, I'm used to it anyway. But I would hope
that, at the same time, you and other people in this forum would
think a little bit about your own attitudes.

There's absolutely no question that you misquoted Boxer's words,
either purposely or by inadvertance. And you could have defused the
whole discussion at any time just be saying, "I accidentally misquoted
Boxer's words, and here's why she isn't a chauvinist pig anyway."
That would have been incredibly simple.

But look what you did instead: You repeated the lie several times,
you covered up the lie, you called me "dishonest" and then "a real
work." (I'm not sure what a "real work" is, but I feel fairly certain
that it's unsavory).

By your last posting I felt that I had to stop because you appeared
to be getting hysterical and melting down completely. You were even
playing a totally irrelevant race card (did you really mean to imply
that it's ok for Jews to be chauvinist pigs?).

There was never any sign of humility. It was just, "I have nothing to
apologize for and will not apologize to you about anything."

Very Nixonian. And that's the point I was making when I referred to
Rose Mary Woods. You and other leftist Boomers have become
indistinguishable from the person you probably despise the most:
Richard Nixon.

This is a situation known as "cognitive dissonance." You are,
typical of Boomers, so certain that you're right that your mind
doesn't even have the room to question your assumptions.
http://www.learningandteaching.info/...dissonance.htm

To you, Bush is evil, Boxer is good, Rice is evil, Bush is lying,
you're telling the truth. Those ideas are fixed in your mind like
concrete. Suddenly you're faced with a situation where Boxer is evil
and you're being accused of lying. I'm not exaggerating when I say
that your mind couldn't even handle it, because to do so would
require breaking too much concrete. You couldn't take the simplest
step of saying, "I accidentally misquoted Boxer's words."

This is exactly the kind of thing that happened in Leon Festinger's
original studies of cognitive dissonance in the 1950s. He
infiltrated a group of fanatics who believed that the world was
coming to an end on a certain date. When the world didn't come to an
end, the most committed leaders of the group didn't say, "I was
wrong." They said, "God has given us a reprieve." And where the group
had previously been secret, they now went public and began to
proselytize.

That's how fanatics act, and that's how Boomers are acting today.

And let me make it clear that this is NOT a partisan issue. The
Republican Neocons have been exactly the same, saying that the plan
to democratize the entire Mideast would have worked fine, if only
Bush had done it right. This is the same identical state of denial
that the leftists are in. This is a Boomer issue, not a partisan
issue. However, I'm addressing a leftist now, so I'll address the
leftist issue.

The situation for leftist Boomers is complicated by the fact that
almost all of them supported the war when it began in 2003. Now
they're acting like reformed drunks who want to burn down every
liquor store.

This is the kind of fanaticism that I've seen frequently among Boomer
politicians and pundits on TV, and documented on my web site. The
worst was Chris Matthews after last week's Presidential address.
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/...070114#e070114

Matthews was off-the-wall furious and completely hysterical. He went
ballistic, saying that Americans would go to be terrified, he said
Bush "still thinks in terms of a hair trigger," and he made it clear
that he knows more about what's going on than anyone else does. On
Imus the next morning, he said, "We have Cheney, who always wants to
kill."

His belief that he knows more than anyone else is especially ironic,
because I've shown that he and other journalists are actually
abysmally ignorant of what's going on in Iraq. In fact, Jeff Stein of
Congressional Quarterly has shown that politicians and government
analysts who are supposed to be "experts" can't answer simple
questions like: What's the difference between Sunni and Shia? Is
al-Qaeda Sunni or Shia?

But Matthews' ability to conclude that he's right and he knows more
than anyone when in fact he knows little is exactly the main
ingredient of fanaticism. His meltdown illustrates the same
phenomenon illustrated by Leon Festinger's fanatical cult: Once the
world didn't ended, they started proselyting.

What's the analogue with Matthews? I think it's this: I think that
he believed that the "anti-war" view was so right that Bush would have
to cave in to the "anti-war" Democrats, and was completely committed
to that view. When Bush didn't do that, he exploded and became public
in his view that the Administration is stupid and murderous.

This fanaticism is the real disease that Boomers have today. What's
the problem with it? Because it can lead to disaster.

• This fanaticism caused Germany's 1930s Prophet generation to
  conclude that Jews are evil and must be exterminated.
  
• This fanaticism caused America's 1930s Prophet generation to
  conclude that any talk of danger from Japan was nonsense, resulting
  in the greatest military disaster in American history, when the
  Pacific fleet was almost entirely destroyed in a couple of hours.
  
• This fanaticism caused Israel to go into total panic and begin
  the summer 2006 Lebanon war within four hours, with no planning and
  no objective. The war was a disaster for Israel. What was fanatical
  belief in this case? This is partly speculation, but I believe it's
  something like this: "Hizbollah cannot abduct Israeli soldiers,
  because we can easily destroy them."

What I've seen is that the Washington Boomer population really is in
a state close to total hysteria.

Do you remember how giddy everyone was on December 6, when Bob Gates
was confirmed to replace Rumsfeld? The Senators were almost
giggling, as they talked about how great the "atmospherics" were.
Journalist David Gergen was broadly smiling when he said on CNN:
"This is the best moment we've had in over three years." It was
almost a love-in.
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/...061207#e061207

Now, like a bunch of manic-depressive people drug addicts, the
Boomers in Washington have gone thoroughly into the depressive phase.
Everything is now a disaster and chaos. All is lost. Death is the
only possibility.

On Sunday's <i>Reliable Sources</i> on CNN Howard Kurtz did a segment
on the hysterical reaction to Barack Obama's candidacy. He quoted a
columnist in Chicago Tribune who likened Obama's coverage by
journalists to "the shrieks of young girls watching the Beatles in
the 1960s."

I interpret this phenomenon in the same manic-depressive way. The
Washington crowd are in a depressive phase, and anyone who's
depressed will grasp at anything to relieve their anxiety, and so
Obama has been getting the "manic" treatment. Sooner or later the
press will turn on Obama, and then he'll see what it's like to get the
depressive treatment.

Friedrich Nietzsche, the German philosopher (Nomad), lived through
the Franco-Prussian war and the Paris Commune, and saw the same
craziness; that's presumably what he meant when he said, "Insanity in
individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and
epochs, it is the rule."

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Katie Couric's Blog

The following has received a lot of comment this week. It was posted
on Katie Couric's web log:

Originally Posted by Katie Couric

> January 15, 2007

> Katie: A Woman At The Table

> One week ago, Katie sat down for a briefing at the White
> House, and noticed something unusual.

> Last Wednesday, President Bush gave his address to the country
> about “the new way forward” for Iraq, and lots of
> journalists—including me, of course—were in Washington to cover
> it. But before the Big Speech, there was the little-known Big
> Meeting.

> The White House invited all the network anchors, and some cable
> anchors, along with the Sunday political show hosts to a meeting
> with unnamed VERY senior administration officials. (Obviously I
> know their names, but the agreement was that in order to attend
> the meeting, we couldn’t reveal the people who spoke to us.)

> And even though I’ve been in this business for more years than
> I’d like to admit, and interviewed countless Presidents and world
> leaders, it’s still thrilling—and even a little awe-inspiring—to
> get “briefed” at the White House, no matter who is sitting in the
> Oval Office.

> And yet, the meeting was a little disconcerting as well. As I was
> looking at my colleagues around the room—Charlie Gibson, George
> Stephanopoulos, Brian Williams, Tim Russert, Bob Schieffer, Wolf
> Blitzer, and Brit Hume—I couldn’t help but notice, despite how
> far we’ve come, that I was still the only woman there. Well, there
> was some female support staff near the door. But of the people at
> the table, the “principals” in the meeting, I was the only one
> wearing a skirt. Everyone was gracious, though the jocular
> atmosphere was palpable.

> The feminist movement that began in the 1970’s helped women make
> tremendous strides—but there still haven’t been enough great leaps
> for womankind. Fifty-one percent of America is female, but women
> make up only about sixteen percent of Congress—which, as the
> Washington Monthly recently pointed out, is better than it’s ever
> been...but still not as good as parliaments in Rwanda (forty-nine
> percent women) or Sweden (forty-seven percent women). Only nine
> Fortune 500 companies have women as CEO’s.

> That meeting was a reality check for me—and not just about Iraq.
> It was a reminder that all of us still have an obligation to ask:
> Don’t more women deserve a place at the table too?

> Posted by Katie Couric at 9:14 AM : January 15, 2007
> http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/01...y2366267.shtml

As I'm sure everyone knows, I don't think very much of this whole
argument, which I consider to be whining.

She says, "The feminist movement that began in the 1970’s helped
women make tremendous strides...." Well, the modern feminist
movement began in the 1830s, and I've explained at length why
feminism -- at least in the form practiced by NOW -- hasn't helped
women, but only turned followers into pathetic loser victims.
Women's tremendous strides in the marketplace have been caused not by
feminism but by technology that permits a woman in the kitchen to do
in half an hour what used to take a whole day.

So I'm posting it in case anyone wants to discuss it.

Incidentally, Couric couldn't resist taking a slam at men when she
said, "Everyone was gracious, though the jocular atmosphere was
palpable."

I guess the guys must have told a joke that Couric didn't approve of.
I wonder what the joke was? It couldn't have been something slamming
the Administration, since Couric would have liked it in that case.

Maybe it was a joke about Barbara Boxer being a chauvinist pig.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Originally Posted by BigStar

Somehow I missed this little snide comment when I was scrolling through last, and I just completed a post in response that included the line "come to the northwest and I'll mangle your fucking face". The offer still stands, but really you little bitch you aren't even worth my time. I signed my contract two weeks ago and by the time I get my diploma I'll be at Ft. Knox for armor training, so if you want to come call me kid to my face you know where I'm at and I just want you to know that this Millenial will ruin your whole day. Snide stupid pieces of shit like you are the type who make the world less liveable for people with some dedication to service. I hope you die before the 4T so you wont even have the chance to make something of yourself. Have fun at work.

I know it kid. Linus is a big jerk. We should like totally kill him or something.

Or maybe we'll just threaten him over the internet.

You let me know.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

What I was doing was imitating and mocking you (and by "you" I mean
you and other leftist Boomers).

Well, scince it's figureative then we had a misunderstanding. You therefore deserve an apology. I am sorry.

Now, you can get all pissed off at me if you want, and call me all
the names you want

Then maybe I can pleasently surprise you by not doing so.

There's absolutely no question that you misquoted Boxer's words,
either purposely or by inadvertance.

It was not the best post I have ever made. I should have phraised things differently.

(I'm not sure what a "real work" is, but I feel fairly certain
that it's unsavory)

In figureative terms, it was a pulled punch. To have said anything more negitive would have been unfair, even from the perspective I had at the time. At this point, it doesn't have to be taken negitivly.

There was never any sign of humility. It was just, "I have nothing to
apologize for and will not apologize to you about anything."

On one hand, I was not trying to be humble. OTOH, saying "never" is not a good policy, I should not have done that.

Ultimatly, what matters most here is the forum. Belief in the saecular theory should be the focus. Being able to communicate with others is what truely matters. Saecular theory may well be one of the "royal roads" to history as S and H say. It is our larger duty to spread knowledge. That must be done with reason, not emotion. Misunderstandings tend to feed on emotion.
Again, I was harsher wth you than I really meant to be, but being called a liar does tend to make one caustic. I am sorry for the misunderstanding.

Originally Posted by Linus

Or maybe we'll just threaten him over the internet.

You let me know.

Don't you get it? That's how Millenials 'take action'.

Dear Rick,

Thank you very much for your extremely generous statement.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

> Ultimately, what matters most here is the forum. Belief in the
> saecular theory should be the focus. Being able to communicate
> with others is what truly matters. Saecular theory may well be
> one of the "royal roads" to history as S and H say. It is our
> larger duty to spread knowledge. That must be done with reason,
> not emotion. Misunderstandings tend to feed on emotion.

I agree with you completely. I believe that those of us in this
forum have a duty to spread knowledge, as you say, simply because
S&H's theory lets us know things that other people don't know.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Mr. Saari,



It's OK to recommend those people, but stop recommending radical
feminists. You DID say that you're my obedient servant, didn't you?

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis

Dear Mr. Xenakis,

Contra Mr. Milton, 'tis: Better to serve at T4T, than reign in GD.

Originally Posted by Mr. Geoffrey Chaucer

For o thyng, sires, saufly dar I seye,
That freendes everych oother moot obeye,
If they wol longe holden compaignye.

The Franklin's Tale


Though I obey as a poster, I sigh as a son.

Yo. Ob. Sv.
VKS

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

Dear Mr. Xenakis,

Contra Mr. Milton, 'tis: Better to serve at T4T, than reign in GD.

The Franklin's Tale


Though I obey as a poster, I sigh as a son.

Yo. Ob. Sv.
VKS

Oh, I was just joking, Mr. Saari. Recommend any nutcake you'd like.



Sincerely,

John